Because it's far easier for a smart person to get a business degree that pays just as well, if not better?<p>Because a degree in engineering is a fast-track to career marginalization by the frat-boy MBAs who see technical workers as interchangeable cogs?<p>Because engineering virtually guarantees you a minimum of social interaction in college, when your peers are actually <i>enjoying</i> their lives?<p>Because you'll run smack into the wall of age (and possibly sex) discrimination, right when you should be entering your prime earning years?<p>Because you've got to eternally compete in the job market with 20-year-olds who will always be more proficient with new technologies, and willing to work at lower wages?<p>Let's be real: as a career, engineering sucks. We shouldn't scratch our heads and act totally <i>shocked</i> when young people turn their noses up at the prospect of working like a dog until they turn 40, only to be laid off by the guys who played frisbee golf and drank their way through school.
I agree that there are probably a lot of improvements to be made in undergraduate engineering education.<p>However...<p>I think it's a big mistake to assume that every engineering dropout represents a failure of the college, or even a failure of the student. Maybe it's simply a question of incoming students not having the slightest idea what an engineering degree is all about. I seem to remember a lot of people who signed up for engineering <i>before</i> they discovered that you need to learn a lot of fairly difficult math and physics to be an engineer, after which they switched to something else.<p>That's why the dropout rate is so much smaller at MIT and other elite engineering schools: The students are preselected for their affinity for math and/or physics. For example, I can't help but notice that Olin's "redefinition of engineering education" includes this bullet point:<p><i>Applicants are required to spend a weekend at Olin before acceptance. During the weekend they participate in team engineering projects to assess their teamwork and technical skill.</i><p>Note: "Assess their technical skill." Now, I'm not saying that Olin's not a great school, but if you get to hand-pick the students, and then <i>you give them a 100% scholarship</i>, having a low dropout rate isn't much of an achievement. I assume with confidence that the vast majority of calculus-phobic people get weeded out before they ever get to Olin. At least, I hope so, because otherwise this practice would be cruel and unusual punishment:<p><i>Other engineering schools require students to take foundational courses in physics, thermo-dynamics, chemistry, and math for the first two years. Olin introduces these disciplines as needed throughout the 4 years.</i><p>If there's anything worse than hitting the wall in year one, it's being encouraged to go through a year or two in the major before you hit the wall.
That's because our system somehow rewards real estate speculators, mortgage brokers, middle management, lawyers and healthcare professionals way more than it rewards engineers. I don't really know why this is happening, but I am sure you all have met a few MBA types who have "the vision" and looking for "just" a code monkey to build their fortune. This is also the reason why GE/Ford/Chrysler continued building shit for decades, giving out multi-million dollar bonuses to their top-tier management.<p>Someone suggested it's because we live in a "services economy" not a "product economy" and, therefore, the value of engineering is declining. There is some truth in that: google isn't an engineering firm, they are in the entertainment business, very much like ESPN, Fox and those annoying guys in big hats at your local Tres Amigos.
A 50% dropout rate may be a sign of health - it means the courses haven't been watered down. I'd be far more worried about a 95% graduation rate. States universities are less selective with general admission, so the engineering departments have to screen out the students who aren't up to the challenge. MIT pre-screens everyone so it's not fair to compare it to state schools.
If I recall correctly, something like 20-30% of undergraduates drop out during the course of their degree. Engineering is generally the most difficult program, so you'd expect that the dropout rates would be higher. I suspect there's also a number of transfers to less demanding programs baked in there.<p>Why should we want to minimize drop-out rates anyway? It doesn't necessarily indicate there's a problem with the curriculum - engineering <i>should</i> be a tough program. The only way you could minimize drop-outs would be to prevent all but the strongest students from entering in the first place. I think it's telling that the highly-selective schools have very low drop-out rates. Is MIT's methodology all that different from less selective universities? I doubt it.
"At the recent Web 2.0 conference John suggested that the US should staple a Green Card to every foreign student's engineering diploma and encourage them to stay in the USA."<p>I really agree this. It's hard for a foreigner to work here.
Because I would have gotten C's & D's in Engineering school working my ass off.<p>Because in business school I graduated with great grades, didn't do anything, and landed a pretty awesome job.<p>Undergraduate business school was somewhat worthless, but all the free time allowed me to learn how to start my own business and campus job hop like a mofo.
Look like I'm showing up late to this discussion.<p>I'll just comment on the "stapling a green card to every engineering degree awarded to a foreign national idea."<p>I have no doubt this would increase the incentives for foreigners to study engineering in the US, but if we <i>only</i> do this in engineering and not in medicine, law, business, art, humanities, etc... well then wouldn't we create an incentive for US citizens to avoid engineering degrees and instead go into areas that are insulated from foreign competition? It seems that this has already happened to some extent. If one of our goals as a nation is to increase the interest of our young people in science and engineering, we should at least consider the effect a program like this on their career choices, shouldn't we?<p>I'm not saying there's no room for debate on this subject, but I'm eternally amazed that pundits almost <i>never</i> consider this possibility when making this recommendation.<p>(BTW, in "the world is flat", Friedman suggested doing this for all doctoral degrees, not just engineering...)
I was hoping that Don Dodge would actually have some kind of technical background (because mixed technical/business backgrounds are in my opinion the best). Nope - accounting undergrad/MBA. Preach to someone else.
The article fails to acknowledge that MIT and Olin have 2% drop-out rates because they are f*ng hard to get in in the first place.<p>The drop-out rate is directly proportional on how easy it is to enroll in a hard program.<p>The school I graduated from, FEI (in Brazil), has a very high drop-out rate in the first semester - about 50% on my freshman year, mostly due to calculus and physics. It's also regarded as a top private school in its field.<p>So, that's why those teachers are not being fired - because students pay for their first semester whether or not they stick around for the second one.
Well, I nearly drop out recent two years. It is unbearable in university to see so many students who are 4th year and don't have basic skills in programming (i.e. comparing two double variables in C with == operator). As playing a while with profs, I am so confident that I have all the skills and knowledges I should know in the next 3 years. It is just had to stick on CS major when you had them all. The only reason I still here is that I am so desperately wanting to publish a good paper in next year.
Any recent engineering grads here who can tell us if there really is a shortage? If you guys are getting multiple job offers with hiring bonuses, there is. If not, there isn't.
It's not useful to compare raw numbers against India and China since their population is larger than ours.<p>Also, what % of total college students drop out? It's got to be near 50 (though maybe less for declared majors).
My theory is that a high percentage are forced out because there are incentives for doing so. Undergraduate programs are ranked based on the percentage of graduates they place in competitive graduate programs and top employers. Getting weaker students to change majors lowers the denominator.<p>Engineering and science faculties, in general, want to produce stars and have little interest in helping students along that find the material interesting but challenging.
I know the wash-out rate at my school -- just during the "freshmen engineering" program was 50%. The next year, the wash out rate was 25%.<p>They don't want airline safety / nuclear reactor controls / bridges devices made by D students. And the best way to ensure that's going to happen is make the person really really really want to call himself an engineer. Its far easier to be a a liberal arts major and convince two girls to follow you back to your place.
If my university only had a 5% drop out rate, I would have studied at the wrong university.
If everybody get's a degree, everybody is equal and your degree is worthless.
Incidentally, the National Science Foundation and the National Council for Teachers of Mathematics describe the Obama's education plan as abysmally bad. Specifically the NSF and NCTM are very much against the AP curriculum, which Obama wants to expand by 50% over the next few years. I think the exact quote is that AP science/math courses represent "the worst kind of pedagogy" or something like that.